[cifani090]

My dad's grandparents got a 3D TV, and its pretty cool. Personally, obviously they are in there 70's and wont use it, and if i were to buy a TV id get a 4K or OLED or LED TV. Probably a 4K most likely.

 

[Anaxilus]

WTH content do you watch w/ a 4K?  Put the demo disc on repeat?

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

WTH content do you watch w/ a 4K?  Put the demo disc on repeat?

Sorry i meant the new Sony Crystal prototype TV, than makes 1080p look like its nighttime.
 

 

 

[Anaxilus]

Ah, yes the Crystal.  I've been wondering about that and how Sony is jumping ship off the OLED bandwagon in favor of Crystal it seems.  For those that don't know, each pixel is it's own LED in the Crystal.  
 
I'm inclined to believe Sony sees potential issues in durability wrt current OLED tech or they messed up in their partnership w/ Samsung.  I believe the prior since Samsung makes notoriously fallible gear that just fails or doesn't work or is improperly spec'd yet they are pressing full speed ahead on OLED despite Sony bailing (sort of).  Could be Sony doesn't want to take the initial OLED hit by competing since big screen profits are nil and they'll let Samsung press economies of scale over time.
 
So, Jonah Hill (Moneyball) for best supporting actor over Albert Brooks (Drive).  WTFreak is that!!

 

[rhythmdevils]

I see no difference between those TV's in the pic (not that you should with a pic) except the chyrstal being more magenta, but the picture clearly isn't color balanced. 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I see no difference between those TV's in the pic (not that you should with a pic) except the chyrstal being more magenta, but the picture clearly isn't color balanced. 

Look at the pic quality, ignore the TVs.
 

 

[rhythmdevils]

Contagion - 7/10
 
Probably the best "outbreak" movie I've ever seen or ever made?  Well done with realistic science for the most part and interesting artistically and visually.  He did his homework beforehand.  Was nice to see him not resort to any of the Hollywood paths.  I actually think most people who really disliked this movie probably disliked it because of this- it was too realistic and didn't over dramatize.  He didn't take any of the easy ways out.  A CDC worker didn't get clumsy and drop a sample or something stupid.  There was no stupid violent drama like some super evil guy killing people or something.  It was almost like a news program.  Dry.  Which is where it could have been better imo.  I thought he tried so hard to make a realistic movie about this outbreak situation that he actually went too far in the other direction.  It was a very calm, fairly collected, emotionless depiction of something that would be anything but.  Matt Damon's character for example showed very little distress about the loss of his family.  No one was freaking out much except for the few moments showing looting, but even then it was just a few people.  They actually hid the CDC worker crying when she wound up sick.  When they talk about millions dying so far, you really don't get a sense of that at all.  It felt "small".  I think just a few shots of crowds of sick people or rows of hospital beds, or a long shot of riots or fires would have gone a long way to put the spotlighted characters into the big picture.  Maybe their budget was too small in which case that's understandable.  But I felt stuck inside a small part of the story.  Which actually is more realistic in terms of the experience of going through that, but not what I wanted to see because the movie wasn't really done in a documentary style. 
 
Still just so great to see a more realist portrayal of what I think is a really fascinating scenario.  Been wanting to see something like this for a long time.  And it did leave me thinking.  The blog character was very realistic.  So overall I think it's a great movie, just could have been better. 

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

Ah, yes the Crystal.  I've been wondering about that and how Sony is jumping ship off the OLED bandwagon in favor of Crystal it seems.  For those that don't know, each pixel is it's own LED in the Crystal.  
 
I'm inclined to believe Sony sees potential issues in durability wrt current OLED tech or they messed up in their partnership w/ Samsung.  I believe the prior since Samsung makes notoriously fallible gear that just fails or doesn't work or is improperly spec'd yet they are pressing full speed ahead on OLED despite Sony bailing (sort of).  Could be Sony doesn't want to take the initial OLED hit by competing since big screen profits are nil and they'll let Samsung press economies of scale over time.
 
So, Jonah Hill (Moneyball) for best supporting actor over Albert Brooks (Drive).  WTFreak is that!!

 
They are really nice! Id love to upgrade my 22' to a 26' or 28'. When i read that they finally got off there asses and put LED's for every pixel, i knew it was going to be good.
 
Quote:

I see no difference between those TV's in the pic (not that you should with a pic) except the chyrstal being more magenta, but the picture clearly isn't color balanced. 

x2, its a crappy picture. Here are two better ones.
 

 

 
 
 

 

[tdockweiler]

Thanks to "Red Tails" getting me back into WWII history, I've been watching a few more movies.
 
In Harm's Way (7.75/10)
 
First was John Wayne's "In Harm's Way". If you check Amazon reviews, it's supposed to be the best movie ever made. Never trust those reviews!
 
The movie felt like it was based on a book and it sure wasn't afraid of possibly boring people to death. It was just barely interesting enough to keep me going. Somehow I finished all nearly 3 hours of it in one night. Felt the script was written by the same guy who wrote the screenplay for "Forrest Gump". Some of the stuff in it was hardly believable. 
 
Believe it or not this is only the 3rd John Wayne movie I've seen. Didn't like many of them. John Ford movies bore me to death and few director's can manage that. At least this one made me want to see more of his movies.
 
Victory at Sea - 7.5/10
 
Got this a year back in the $5 bill at Wal-Mart. Feels like a propaganda movie designed to get me to join the army. Fairly interesting and despite being only 4 hours in, there is only a few things mentioned I didn't already know. I've seen quite a few WW2 documentaries already though. I was kind of shocked that the Tokyo bombing was only mentioned briefly, as if they didn't want to make us look bad or something.
 
Bad thing about this movie is that I had to EQ my TV in order to hear the dialogue clearly. It's almost impossible to hear!
 
I still think the best WW2 documentary i've seen is "WWII in HD". It's not some cheapy gimmick to try and get you to buy a movie. It's actually worth every penny. As far as WW2 movies, I'd rank it higher than even "The Pacific".
 
BTW has anyone seen the old Frank Capra movie "Why we Fight"? Reminds me of Victory at Sea.
 
I also recently watched "Thirty Seconds over Tokyo" on TV. I really liked this one, but only as a history lesson. Most might not like it.
 
Anyone know of any old WW2 movies that are kind of like hidden gems? Here's a few for you...
 
The One that Got Away
Story about a German POW that successfully escape from an american POW camp...in Canada(!) and is able to make his way back to Germany!! I need to buy this one DVD.
 
The Wooden Horse
old british film about a POW camp escape. Had to import it from the UK.
 
The Dam Busters - loved this one
Mostly about an operation to design a way to destroy dams during WW2 by getting bombs to bounce off the water and hit their targets.
 
I keep forgetting this old WW2 movie that was produced by the chinese and released in the USA. Nevermind, it's a vietnam war movie called "Boys in Company C".
It's the first role of the drill sergeant from Full Metal Jacket. The acting from Stan Shaw in this movie was pretty good from what I remember.
This movie seems unknown to most.
 
One WW2 movie I never get sick of is "Von Ryan's Express". I think the WW2 movie I hate the most is "The Train". 100% bored the entire movie.

 

[J W]

Vagabond - Agnes Varda. 10/10. Wow. Powerful but depressing. Tricks? Gimmicks?. A movie which has a subtle relationship with the viewer. It's peculiar, frankly, that I feel that I've invested very little into it, yet I also feel that I can take quite a bit from it. 

 

[antberg]

ya,contagion is a great movie.agree on your rating

 

[oqvist]

I smell dirty tactics? Putting an LCD in an angle like that? And then having what looks like more saturated colours on the crystal led and turned up brightness is another cheap trick. But the latter may be due to the former.

 
Quote:

 
They are really nice! Id love to upgrade my 22' to a 26' or 28'. When i read that they finally got off there asses and put LED's for every pixel, i knew it was going to be good.
 

x2, its a crappy picture. Here are two better ones.
 

 

 
 
 

 

 

[oqvist]

Thin Red Line! Absolutely a thin red line between Mallicks movies. Hasn´t happened much between this and Tree of Life.
Absolutely brilliant again! 9/10. Would have liked to see the rumoured 5-6h version.

 

[jax]

Yes, not only that, but one image is larger than the other.  I don't really get what folks are seeing as an improvement in those pics either.  The one on the bottom actually looks like the image in the closer screen has a magenta cast to it while the further one appears more neutral. On the top it appears that the color gamut is larger on the closer one.  Who knows how those screens were setup and optimized - they could easily be setup to make one look better than the other.  Given that's what the manufacturer is trying to do it makes you wonder.   The picture on my backlit LCD Samsung 55 is stunning.  I can't really imagine wanting something more.  At that point pointing at marginal improvements in sharpness and tonal accuracy is akin to suggesting you might prefer reading a novel that is printed with slightly sharper type on the paper.  Once I'm involved in a film, if its a good film, I'm pretty much never focusing on BS details like how accurate the reds are and how many blackheads I can count on someones face.  If the picture were flawed in some way I might be distracted, but I see no flaws in it as it is, and nothing really to improve upon that would necessarily enhance my enjoyment of the material.  And I'm a visual professional, FWIW.     
 
Mallick is a genius.  Go back a ways to some of his earlier stuff and check out a young Richard Gere in Days of Heaven.  It's a pretty slow moving film, but just stunningly beautiful from shot to shot.  
 
Saw a good documentary on inner city kids in Philadelphia competing for Culinary Scholarships, called Pressure Cooker.  Low budget and shows it being pretty rough around the edges, but it's moving nonetheless. Makes you thankful for great teachers, one of whom is central to the film. 
 
Quote:

I smell dirty tactics? Putting an LCD in an angle like that? And then having what looks like more saturated colours on the crystal led and turned up brightness is another cheap trick. But the latter may be due to the former.

 


 

 

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

Yes, not only that, but one image is larger than the other.  I don't really get what folks are seeing as an improvement in those pics either.  The one on the bottom actually looks like the image in the closer screen has a magenta cast to it while the further one appears more neutral. On the top it appears that the color gamut is larger on the closer one.  Who knows how those screens were setup and optimized - they could easily be setup to make one look better than the other.  Given that's what the manufacturer is trying to do it makes you wonder.   The picture on my backlit LCD Samsung 55 is stunning.  I can't really imagine wanting something more.  At that point pointing at marginal improvements in sharpness and tonal accuracy is akin to suggesting you might prefer reading a novel that is printed with slightly sharper type on the paper.  Once I'm involved in a film, if its a good film, I'm pretty much never focusing on BS details like how accurate the reds are and how many blackheads I can count on someones face.  If the picture were flawed in some way I might be distracted, but I see no flaws in it as it is, and nothing really to improve upon that would necessarily enhance my enjoyment of the material.  And I'm a visual professional, FWIW.    

x2, and im also not sure what these photo's were taken at an angle. Anyways, ive never bought a TV online, so id have to see the difference at Best Buy or Costco or something.